Re: pg_attribute size

From: Scott Marlowe <scott(dot)marlowe(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Anj Adu <fotographs(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com>, pgsql-admin(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_attribute size
Date: 2009-10-26 23:27:05
Message-ID: dcc563d10910261627h4ec4b7b8y9409d36f6cdf9893@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-admin

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Anj Adu <fotographs(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> We have several partitioned tables that get dropped every day ..We do
> not do autovacuum as it is an IO hog (and most tables are dropped
> anyways..and the large tables are never updated)..

1: autovac can be adjusted to use much less IO than regular vacuum.
2: You can tell it to ignore certain tables.

> I however did a plain vacuum analyze and that fixed the problem with
> tools(e.g pgadmin) that accessed the data dictionary and were very
> slow before the vacuum.

Huh. Is the pg_attribute size much smaller?

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-admin by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Anj Adu 2009-10-26 23:35:35 Re: pg_attribute size
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-10-26 23:07:21 Re: Warm standby problems